Jump to content

Prayut Says Gov’t Right To Take Yingluck Assets Before Verdict


Recommended Posts

Posted
19 hours ago, webfact said:

He said it was irrelevant that her guilt has not yet been established by the court,

Tell it like it is...

Courts are irrelevant as long as I rule.

Posted
19 hours ago, webfact said:

Yingluck seizure follows law, won’t hurt reconciliation, says Deputy Minister 

By The Nation

 

Deputy Minister of Defence Gen Udomdej Sitabutr said he believes that seizure of former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s assets would not affect the ongoing reconciliation attempt.

 

The matter followed legal process, he said. Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan had already explained that actions being taken are within the law and the matter was currently proceeding through the justice system, he added.

 

While declining to go into detail, Udomdej said that there was nothing to worry about concerning the case.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/breakingnews/30321976

 
thenation_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-07-27

 

:cheesy:  They really don't care what anyone thinks do they?

 

  This just might be the straw that broke the Camel's back,  while it certainly needs to happen I hope it doesn't while I'm here with my young family.....

Posted

The silly little general can take this stance, having effectively given himself and his cronies immunity from any such malfeasance on their part.

Posted

 'The matter followed legal process, he said. Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan had already explained that actions being taken are within the law and the matter was currently proceeding through the justice system, he added.'

 

Which  process and system they invent and interpret as they go along especially and exclusively for the Shinawatras.

Posted

She will do a runner & there will most unfortunately be more blood on the streets.

This one reminds me a bit of Jakarta 25 years ago.

The PM wants to be a bit careful about "the power of the people"

The kettle is not boiling but is coming up to a simmer

Posted

"He said it was irrelevant that her guilt has not yet been established by the court,"

Huge ego showing through here; he is in effect saying my government and I do not need courts

Courts are irrelevant

Posted
23 hours ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Yes and her money is confiscated three weeks before her verdict. 

 

Perfectly normal. 

 

Have te your friend scheduled her funeral yet?

 

Confiscated and frozen are not the same. But hey, don't let that little misquote stop your game.

Posted
2 hours ago, YetAnother said:

"He said it was irrelevant that her guilt has not yet been established by the court,"

Huge ego showing through here; he is in effect saying my government and I do not need courts

Courts are irrelevant

that is what Art 44 is all about

Posted
6 hours ago, Lemonltr said:

Maybe I was trying to be too brief. Many were saying the money was only frozen not removed from the account.  Sorry.

 

The fact is we don't know. And probably never will.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...